In article , "Bob S." wrote:
To others that object to this thread - then don't read it - real simple. But
don't tell me that bashing your tablesaw into alignment is a good thing and
that wood moves. You can bash on your tools if you like, I prefer to find
out why they won't align and fix the problem - properly. As you'll note,
several others have advised him to return the saw.

Who ever said that bashing a TS into alignment *was* a good idea? Not me. Or
is that another one of your red herrings?

Okay Doug,

Please go back and cut and paste in your next post exactly what it is that I
said was wrong. Below is the statement I think you're referring to but hell
I've been wrong on every other count according to you - so please show me.

I already did that in an earlier post, but it appears you weren't paying
attention. If you had been, you wouldn't "think" that this is the statement
which I took issue with, you would know, because I quoted it and _explicitly_
stated that this was the one.

No need for me to do it again, especially as you have just done it for me.

Or perhaps you could go back and re-read the first post I made in this thread
(which you either failed to read, or failed to understand), in which I pointed
out your mistaken statements.

Here's that post verbatim....(and I pointed out in an earlier post how to
align the miter gauge to 90°)

"Also read your other post below. To make the point clear, since it is not
irrelevant, the miter gauge needs to be 90° to the miter slot before any
alignment if it is the point of reference.

RIGHT THERE. "the miter gauge needs to be 90° to the miter slot". FALSE.

As adjustments are being made,
(this being the key thought) the angle will change (angle of attack) and so
will the distance between the blade and reference point. He must reset
his reference point to the front of the blade and then push it forward to
check for any differences."

Past that, I agreed the miter gauge could be at other than 90° - as long as
the point of reference (miter gauge) is reset after making an adjustment.

So you contradicted yourself. Want a cookie?

It's not a wrong statement at all. Would the word "should" be substituted
for "needs" in the above statement clarify it any better?

No, because it would still be a false statement. The miter gauge can be at any
angle you please -- as long as it stays at the *same* angle for any given pair
of fore-and-aft measurements.

How would you have stated it?

See above.

How about just take your tape measure and measure from the blade to the
miter slot?

Not accurate enough to suit me. Maybe it is for you.

How would you insure the angle of the tape was the same after
each measurement? My point was and is, set it at 90° and use that as the
reference. You want something other than that - fine but it doesn't make my
statement wrong.

Your statement that it "needs to be at 90" IS wrong.

Should I have said pick any angle you want and align the blade?

Of course -- it's the truth.

What purpose would that have served?

Avoiding making you look silly?

It probably would have confused him but only
he could answer that. I provided a reference for him - just as you would
when you're trying to teach someone something. I was trying to impart a
proper method and steps for him to follow.

Your method's fine. It's just that _one_statement_ I take issue with.

So if that's wrong then so be it.

Bob S.

The *entire* substance of the disagreement between us is your repeated and
erroneous claim that the angle between the miter gauge and the miter slot
somehow makes a difference in aligning the miter slot to the blade.
Address
*that* issue, without raising any further red herrings, or be quiet.



--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek-at-milmac-dot-com)

For a copy of my TrollFilter for NewsProxy/Nfilter,
send email to autoresponder at filterinfo-at-milmac-dot-com